By Michael Phillips | MDBayNews
November 26, 2025

Montgomery County likes to pride itself on being a model of progressive, transparent governance. But the recent process to replace At-Large Councilmember Gabe Albornoz is a reminder that even the most self-described “open” governments often make their most consequential decisions in the dark.

When Albornoz announced he would vacate his seat on December 1, the Council invited county residents to apply for the temporary appointment. Sixty-seven Democrats submitted letters and résumés.

What happened next was unprecedented.

Behind closed doors, the Council eliminated 64 of those 67 applicants — a full 95% — without releasing a single name, résumé, or explanation.
Only three finalists were revealed when the Council was already finished narrowing the field.

For a seat that will vote on billion-dollar budgets, land-use decisions, public safety legislation, transportation policy, and tax measures, such an opaque process cannot be brushed off as routine. It is a window into how power operates in a one-party local government — and how far Montgomery County has drifted from the standards it upheld just a decade ago.

---

A Process Conducted Mostly in Secret

Under Montgomery County Charter §106, the Council must fill a vacancy when less than a year remains in the term — preventing a special election.

But nothing in the charter requires secrecy.
Nothing prevents transparency.
Nothing prevented the Council from repeating the open, public process used in 2014.

Instead, the Council conducted the elimination of nearly the entire applicant pool in closed executive sessions.

The contrast is stark:

Vacancy Year	Applicants	Names Released?	Public Interviews?	% Eliminated Privately
2014 (Ervin)	18	Yes	Yes	22%
2025 (Albornoz)	67	No	No	95%

Sources: Bethesda Magazine (2014 archives), Montgomery Perspective (2025).

In 2014, the Council disclosed every applicant, published materials online, and interviewed 14 candidates in public — with archived video still available.
In 2025, residents are told only that three finalists remain.
Nothing more.
Not even the names of the 64 who were dismissed.

The Council’s attorney, Christine Wellons, denied an MPIA request for the applications by political analyst Adam Pagnucco, citing the “personnel records” exemption under Maryland General Provisions §4-311.

This interpretation is, at best, debatable. At worst, it’s a misuse of a narrow exemption to shield an inherently public process behind bureaucracy.

Attorney Robin Lenker of the Montgomery County Civic Federation raised similar concerns in a public letter on October 21 urging the Council to avoid closed sessions altogether. The Federation argued that nothing in the vacancy process justified an exemption from the Open Meetings Act. The Council did not change course.

---

What the Council Says — and Why It Falls Short

Council President Kate Stewart defended the secrecy, stating:

“In an effort to attract the best applicants to serve for less than one year, initial application materials will be kept confidential.”

This explanation mirrors the Council’s broader stance: confidentiality protects applicants and encourages participation.

But this argument has serious flaws:

1. It contradicts the County’s own 2014 precedent.

Applicants were public then, and the process worked smoothly.

2. The applicant pool this year was much larger.

Sixty-seven people applied — more than triple the 2014 number.
There is no evidence that public disclosure deters quality applicants; in fact, the opposite may be true.

3. Secrecy prevents scrutiny of insider bias.

Without knowing who applied, residents cannot assess whether qualified community leaders, nonprofit advocates, small-business owners, educators, or immigrant voices were sidelined.

4. It increases distrust in a one-party system.

Montgomery County is run entirely by Democrats.
Unchecked power requires more transparency, not less.

---

This Appointment Isn’t Ceremonial — It’s a Vote That Counts

The new at-large member will vote on:

• the $6.1 billion FY2026 budget
• tax policy amid revenue shortfalls
• MCPS funding during record instructional loss and staffing crises
• land-use and zoning decisions affecting housing supply
• public safety reforms
• transportation and infrastructure investments
• rental policies and development controversies

And because the appointee must pledge not to run in 2026, they will be:

• unelected,
• unaccountable to voters,
• immune from electoral consequences,
• empowered to cast deciding votes,
• and immediately influential on the most consequential budget cycle in years.

This is the definition of a role requiring heightened transparency — not secrecy.

---

The Three Finalists: Qualified, But All Insiders

The finalists — each qualified in their own right — share a notable trait: all are established county insiders.

Reemberto Rodriguez

Former Silver Spring Regional Services Director. Known for community development and planning work.

Shebra Evans

Two-term Board of Education member (2016–2024) and former BOE President. Lost her 2024 reelection.

Henry Lee

Former Board of Education member, though less publicly documented.

These are not the surprising or diverse community voices one might expect from a pool of 67 applicants in one of America’s most diverse counties.

A well-circulated comment by local reporter Ginny Bixby on X summed up public reaction:

“Of course they’re insiders. Was anyone surprised?”

The question isn’t whether these finalists are competent.
They clearly are.

The deeper question is:
Were 64 other applicants — many of them likely representing immigrant communities, younger residents, civic organizations, and business sectors — ever given a meaningful chance?

No one outside the Council knows.
And that’s the problem.

---

Potential Conflicts and the “Soft Landing” Problem

A subtle but important angle deserves more attention:

Gabe Albornoz left the Council to return to a leadership role under County Executive Marc Elrich — the same administration he previously worked for before being elected.

This creates the impression — fair or not — of a coordinated soft landing:

• Albornoz resigns on a date that ensures the vacancy is filled by appointment, not election.
• His successor will be chosen by his colleagues.
• His new role is within the Elrich administration.
• The replacement’s inability to run in 2026 keeps the playing field clean for establishment-aligned candidates.

Nothing here is illegal.
But the choreography raises questions about political self-preservation over democratic participation.

---

The Diversity Problem No One Is Talking About

Montgomery County is:

• 38% White
• 20% Black
• 20% Hispanic
• 15% Asian
• One of the nation’s most immigrant-rich suburban counties

A pool of 67 applicants in a county like this almost certainly contained:

• multilingual candidates
• immigrants
• business owners
• civic activists
• community organizers
• leaders outside County government

Yet all finalists have roots firmly inside existing governmental institutions.

This is not inherently wrong — but without seeing the applicant pool, residents cannot know whether the Council passed over community voices who rarely have access to these opportunities.

Transparency enables accountability.
Secrecy enables gatekeeping.

---

A National Pattern: When One-Party Local Governments Stop Practicing Democracy

Montgomery County is not unique.

Cities like San Francisco, New York City, Chicago, Minneapolis, and Seattle have all faced lawsuits or civic backlash over opaque appointment processes in recent years.

Political scientists refer to this phenomenon as “informal power consolidation.”
It occurs when:

• elections become noncompetitive
• the same party holds every office
• informal norms replace formal accountability
• transparency becomes optional

Montgomery County, as a one-party jurisdiction, is showing all the warning signs.

---

Residents Deserve Better — and Still Have Time to Demand It

The public still has one window to influence this process:

December 2 — Public Interviews

The finalists will be questioned in open session.
Residents can submit questions or comments to the Council in advance.

December 9 — Appointment Vote

The Council will choose the new member.

Before those dates, residents can demand transparency.

Call to Action:
If you believe County residents deserve to know who applied for this powerful role, contact:

📧 council.clerk@montgomerycountymd.gov
📧 county.council@montgomerycountymd.gov

Ask them directly:
Release the names — and materials — of all 67 applicants.

Sunshine isn’t optional.
It’s the foundation of public trust.

And Montgomery County is running out of it.